About your Search

20120501
20120531
STATION
CSPAN2 286
LANGUAGE
English 286
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 286 (some duplicates have been removed)
of grievances that the united states had against great britain in the early 19th century. many are associated with maritime disputes between great britain and the united states because this is the middle of that -- napolian wars. they are trying to establish trade, and they are impressing seamen from american vessels because they need to script crews to keep the royal navy manned because they were disputing with the british and the indians on the frontier, and british policy affected the prizes very badly, and prizes for american exports slumped during this period causing an agricultural depression making people angry. there's a whole range of those sort of grievances. basically, i think why the war was ultimately fought and why it was fought when it was because many of the disputes have been preceded in 1812 by a number of years without necessarily producing the declaration of war was that by the summer of 1811, the main grievance was something called the council, a british form of executive order, the american equivalent is the executive order issued by the president, and through the execut
for attacks against the united states. >> thank you. let me just conclude by saying that former cia director mike hayden used used the analogy of a football field, the lines on the football field, and he talked about our intelligence operatives and others as the players on the field. and he said we need them to get chalk on their cleats, go right up to the line in carrying out what our approved policies of the united states. and if you think about it that way, it is really important to have policies that are transparent so that those who are carrying out the mission and those in the united states and those around the world who are trying to understand the mission know where the lines are. if we don't know what the lines are, some people will be risk averse, other people commit excesses. we have certain seeing a few of those, which are black eyes on our country. so i just want to applaud the fact that john brennan has come over here from the white house, spent over an hour with us, laying out in great detail what the rules are for something that has been revealed today, which is the use of dr
of the more tangled problems. historians point* two grievances the united states had against great britain. many are associated with maritime disputes because this is the middle of the napoleonic wars. and the british need to keep them were real baby manned and then the gap british and the then very badly route the period so there is a range of those grievances. the reason it was fought to this many disputes were preceded by a number of years with the summer of 1811 the main grievance was the council. our british form of the executive order. but the british proclaims sweeping blockades designed to stop the new trolls. from taking the experts and the produce in europe. they have been disputing this and it seems it could be negotiated. and the event that the british will not were a. >> it is hard to do public opinion likely due but is the most important but to declaration incongruous were not by wide margins in the house of representatives. it was very close in the senate. 19/13 if three boats had changed the senate, it could not pass the war bell. and it debated near the two weeks and it wa
of international waters. 162 countries and the european community have ratified the treaty but the united states is not to read to the secretary of state hillary clinton and defense secretary leon panetta urged the senate to approve the treaty setting national security, job creation and oil exploration. they testified at the senate foreign relations committee. it's just under three hours. >> the hearing will come to order. thank you all very much for being with us today. secretary clinton, secretary panetta and general dempsey, welcome, we are privileged to have you here today. we thank you for joining us. it's a rare occasion in any committee but in this committee when we have simultaneously a panel of witnesses that brings together americans top diplomat, our country's top descends official and our nation's top military officer. your presence here altogether powerfully underscores the importance that you put on this issue. our committee shares the sense of importance which is why i hope without respect to party or ideology we begin an open, honest and comprehensive discussion about whether the
in history the united states needs latin america more than latin america needs the united states? now comcast your mind back -- cast your mind back to a decade ago, that question would seem absurd. the united states was the undisputed heavyweight champion of the world, the most powerful country economically, politically, militarily. why on earth would he need anyone, let alone a continent known for its economic crises, its political instability for having almost no global clout? well, how times have changed. and how used we have become to the fact of change. there's an old jewish joke i heard probably about 5000 times when i was growing up, and it's set in eastern europe in the 19 century in a period when borders were changing very rapidly. and the story goes that a woman is taking up washington in a remote area and the soldier rides up and he declares old woman, from this day forth, this man -- this land is no longer politically his imperial russian. she watches him go. thank god, i couldn't stand another polish winter. [laughter] thank you for laughing. i will pass those laughs on to my fat
the united states and europe remain each other's best parkhurst and that when the american president or european leader looks how the public and says pudu one call when there's a problem of the person on the other side of the cleantech. my judgment is that is not going to change anytime soon partly because of the affinity of interest of the values and also there aren't other options and even though there are emerging countries out your waist count on our european allies and to rely on our european allies more than we can count on a cost-cutting. at the same time i think it's clear that we are at the cusp of a major historic transition in the global landscape in which the world that nato represents his losing the primacy it enjoyed the last 200 years and if you look at the share of global product represented by nato and i would include japan because they are a part of the western world since world war ii we've gone from roughly 70% of the global product to 50% and we are headed towards 40% and that says to me the big security question of the day are about how we are going to manage th
front of the u.s. capitol, this is half an hour. >> ladies and gentlemen, the president of united states. >> detail, colors. present arms. [silence] >> detail, color guard, right shoulder, order. arm. >> please stand for the assessment of the colors like united states capitol police, and remain standing for our national anthem. [silence] >> detail, color guar guard. present arms. >> we will now have the national anthem by kathy williams. ♪ oh, say, can you see ♪ by the dawn's early light ♪ what so proudly we hailed ♪ at the twilight's last gleaming? ♪ ♪ whose broad stripes and bright stars ♪ ♪ thro' the perilous fight ♪ o'er the ramparts we watched ♪ were so gallantly streaming t ♪ and the rockets red glare ♪ the bombs bursting in air ♪ gave proof through the night ♪ that our flag was still there ♪ ♪ oh, say, does that star-spangled banner yet wave ♪ ♪ o'er the land of the free ♪ and the home of the brave? >> detail, color guard. order, right shoulder, arms. >> please remain standing for the invocation. >> please join me in prayer. our gracious fathe
have china china assets from the border with north korea. the last thing the united states or china wants is some sort of confrontation that would somehow cause them to butt heads as they did in 1953, so i think any time there is a serious thought given to some sort of military action this is constantly at the top, not even the top even halfway up the escalation ladder this is constantly the concern that i think every u.s. president has had to think about seriously, so that is certainly one of the reasons, the china factor, and the other is that we, the united states went into iraq or afghanistan because it became the top foreign policy issue on which the head ministrations of a resolution. now, we can debate whether there was the right or wrong finger. many americans think it was the wrong thing. many americans think nothing was resolved and, you know, that's a completely different question. i think the plant for korea is i don't really think that the north korea issue has risen to that level of priority. it's been a crisis the you want to solve at least in the sense of preventing
the gaithersburg book festival we hear from david stew wetter on the third vice president of the united states. his called everyone emperor. he he's introduced by john ashman the founder of the gaithersburg book festival. >> surveys are available at the tend. we hope you enjoy the rest of of your day at the festival. [inaudible conversations] good afternoon, everyone. welcome to the third annual gaithersburg book festival. i'm judd ashman a member of the city council. oop. i hope everyone is all right over there. [inaudible conversations] it is a i have i vibrant diversity that celebrates the support of the cultural arts. we're pleased to bring the event free of charge thanks to the generous support of our sponsors. for our consideration and everyone here, i should say, please silence any devices that make any kind of noise at all. in order keep improving the event. we want your feedback. please grab a survey from the table over here. from the info booth it'll be up on the website as of later today. please help us keep improving the event. if there's time for qa please come to the microphone with t
of real significance to the united states. to do that, we will dedicate 80% of our effort to four major cases. right now they are syria, kenya, north/central america and burma. then we'll have another eight to ten places where we can test new approaches or make a welcome difference by just sending the the right person at the right time. so far i think we're gaining traction in each of our major priority engagements. many of you are working in these places, and we realize that we won't know it all or know best about them, so we hope for your support. in syria we are providing a nontraditional surge to empower and unite a fractured, nonviolent opposition. as the secretary announced, that includes providing nonlethal assistance. we are also working with partners to set up an outpost for the internal opposition to coordinate and communicate with the international community. in kenya we are helping to develop plans to insure peaceful and credible elections a year before the vote. incidentally, kenya is one place where we've seen a potential model for broad cooperation and innovation. in nort
a bigger problem within diplomacy. but the united states has been willing to use both force and diplomacy to really try to solve the problem. i think in the case of north korea, that that -- it's just not registered like that. that is not specific to any administration. we have had crises with north korea and every administration has made the same calculation. when we reach a crisis with north korea, are we willing to go all-out to the end to solve this thing, or do we want a solution that will park it momentarily, put him diplomatic tracks, present and kevin and want move on to the other issues that most concern us, whether it is the domestic and economic situation or iraq or afghanistan or syria or the middle east peace process. these tend to be the more it important issues in u.s. foreign policy. >> the other issue that makes iraq different is the u.s. korea alliance. have you see the dynamics of the alliance playing into our ability to adjust the top concerns that the u.s. has related to north korea's nuclear program? >> undeniably, and when we look at the situation, south korea is mo
disruptive not only in a conflict can be destructive to the united states but other countries as well and that is one of the things about military operations in cyberspace with cascading effect that are hard to predict. we have concerns about this and this is why we created joint military platforms like a strategic security dialogue to talk about issues that we feel our potential for friction in the u.s./china relationship. cyber is one of those areas. we don't talk about space, nuclear and missile defense areas as part of the strategic dialogue. >> you mentioned last year spending was almost double what the public acknowledgment was. what things will you give us as examples that they are spending on this year? you did not speculate on the number but what they are spending on this year but not publicly acknowledged? >> we think their nuclear force modernization occurs and research and development money that goes through their defense industry we also think is from a different budget, a different account. some foreign acquisitions come from a different account as well and some local co
. china sits right on the border with north korea. the last thing the united states or china wants is some sort of confrontation or a configuration of the peninsula that would cause the two to butt heads as they did in 1953, and so i think any time there is serious thought given to some sort of military action, this is constantly at the top -- not even the top, but half way up the ladder, this is a concern that every u.s. president, i think, has had to think about seriously. i think that's certainly one of the reasons, the china factor, and the other is that we, united states went into iraq or afghanistan because it became thee top foreign policy issue on which the administration saw a revolution, a final resolution. now, we can debate whether that was the right or wrong thing. many americans think it was the wrong thing. many americans think that nothing was resolved there, and, you know, that's a completely different question. i mean i think the point for korea is that i don't really think that the north korea issue has risen to that level of priority for an administration. it's been a c
the veto word is not used, also not used in the constitution of the united states but no one doubts the president has it. we have the ability to do it to the language that is there. that will become a bit more clear as we come forward. >> thank you, chairman kerry. i'm very glad that we're having this in today and i appreciate all of you for being here. senator webb and i sent chairman kerry and ranking member luber a letter back in april urging we move forward to consideration of law of the sea treaty and i'm grateful to your broad and searching and supportive testimony here today. when i was brand-new to the senate, one of the earlier meetings i took was with the then outgoing chief of naval operations. when i asked him what is the single most important thing we can do to help the navy over the next decade, he said without hesitation, ratify the law of the sea treaty. i was taken aback by the. given other budget priorities, operational issues, as it turned out admiral estimation of the importance of this issue is shared i'm stomach every living chief of naval operations not to men
themselves to interpret the picture. but let me see. separating from the rest of the world, the united states of america. filet and i have adopted as my home. it has paid less and less literally to the translation. there has been a lot of more translation of english literature than there was from the land that many considered to be the end of the. >>host: is there a contemporary woman right to you would recommend? >>guest: absolutely. let me say first in spite of the islamic republic or because it is usually u.s. wants. the big men are center stage. one example. 1947 the first major collection of short stories pro but then passed away a couple of weeks ago. at the age of 19. when they pull it goes back and cannot you don't need a directors, crew, the women are formed in the segregated society. 1947 you have those 30 equal to the number of men. but look gain at conscientious when this talk about the national poets of our country. not recognized by the government but by the people. inside and outside that could to save. the first time has become day woman from my country. >>host: we're really l
is that the united states as a individual nation and nato collectively as an alliance have to do long-term thinking about where it. wants to be in ten or eight years time. and outline the type of missions it envisions undertaking in the future and what capabilities will be required to undertake the missions. and kind of set some -- identify some kind of priority areas for the alliance knowing that most allies simply aren't going to be able to do everything every time. not every ally will be able to do everything from peace keeping to high intensity combat. we have a number of al thrice have reached that point and are starting to specialize and develop these capabilities if it's not coordinated you could end up with everybody. it's like a pot luck dinner. you don't have any main course when everybody brings desert. the summit going to try to start the alliance on the healthier course. but it's also going to start first and foremost with delivering on some commitments made in lisbon. you might remember, the alliance watched the lisbon critical caimentn'ts commitment. where the alliance identified ten
book, "crusade 2.0", which is about islamic phobia and its effects in the united states, studied by city life, great press. and instead of reading from the book, i thought it was just a presentation for you and for part. the four parts are going to be a visit, a palm, and e-mail and then finally a political ad. let's start with this. a couple weeks ago i went to new york city have visited park 51, an interesting islamic cultural center. and there he saw the different programs they have available. they teach error back, calligraphy. they have a course on capillary, a brazilian martial art. it was a fascinating, it occurs to me, you might not know what i'm talking about because you might not recognize part 51, the action name part 51 because you might be more familiar with the name that was used in the media to describe park 51, which is of course the ground zero mosque. it was two years ago that this islamic cultural center, not a mosque in knoxville is located at ground zero, but several blocks away became the focus of the great controversy. i don't know if you remember that two
? >> the civil rights section is a unit of the government that was created in 1939 in the united states, just before world war ii. when it was created, it was part of the department of justice, and then it was created, it was thought to be -- it's charge was to protect individual rights, fundamental individual rights. but people were not exactly sure what that meant. with a first thought it meant was labor rights. the rights of workers trying to collectively organize into unions. when world war ii started, race became much more prominent on the national political scene. the civil rights section started to think about how to protect the rights of african-americans. as a result they started to think about how to protect the rights of african-american workers. in the 1940s, it the civil rights takes a whole bunch of cases, and it prosecutes all kinds of employers for violation of civil rights causes. >> was informed by order or legislation? >> it was formed by executive order, franklin roosevelt, and at the request of frank murphy, who was the attorney general. frank murphy was a big labor guy f
to pass and send the message to the world that the united states senate supports the stated policy of our government in this critical issue. nobody wants iran to be able to move forward and attain nuclear capacity, and i am -- i'd be very concerned about moving forward on this language as it currently appears to me to be stated. mr. reid: is there an objection by either senator kyl or senator -- mr. kyl: yes, mr. president, for the reasons noted, i would hope that we could work our colleagues to fix the problem here. until we do i would have to object. the presiding officer: objection is heard. mr. reid: mr. president, this is sump a such an interesting conversation on the floor. i didn't have the papers. i don't blame nigh friend infrastructure arizona for not having the dowvment i don't blame nigh friend from missouri for only having a half-hour to look at this. this thing was given to the republican leader yesterday in midday. all right? now, mr. president, the language they're objecting to was in the base bill. so unless they didn't read the base bill, we have a problem here. now, the
can win an academy award someday and the guy behind you can be a future president of the united states or even better than that the mayor of new york city the guy in front of you could be a future nobel laureate not to your right but certainly the one to your left. it's even worse than it looks in which they argue that washington partisanship has caused congress to become dysfunctional. we talked to the authors on wednesday washington journal. this is just under an hour. >> the gentleman that for a book are taking a look at congress it's even worse than that looks how the american constitutional system collided with the new politics of extremism. joining us, the author norman and co-author resident scholar of the american enterprise institute thomas mann of the brookings institution where he served studies senior fellow. gentlemen, thanks for joining us. >> happy to be with you. >> the question is if it is worse than it looks, what exactly is worse? >> guest: we are now in a situation which we have a fundamental mismatch between our political parties which would become intensely polari
incomes were growing more equal in the united states and the great divergence which is a period when incomes were growing more unequal. the pattern towards greater income equality from 34 to 79 was so pronounced that a whole economic theory was built around the idea that this is simply what happened in an advanced industrial economy after the disruption of industrialization in the late 19th and early 20th century, this was theorized you would expect to see a steadily, a move towards tedly more equal -- steadily more equal income. simon -- [inaudible] who formulated this theory essentially said -- he didn't put it quite this way -- but he essentially said it was the mark of a civilized nation that incomes had become more equal. but as you can see, we started becoming uncivilized in 1979. here you see that the trend, the income share of the top 1% which has doubled since 1979 is growing faster the higher up the income scale you go. so it's really being driven by the richest of the rich. when i say income share, i mean the the percentage of the nation's collective income that is going t
distrust and resentment of the united states can be traced to the mexican war. the mexican war also hastened the civil war. it might not have been fought if the mexican war had not opened the volatile slavery debate. now, the mexican war's often confused with the texan war for independence from mexico ten years earlier in 1836. the texas revolution is known for the battles of the alamo and san ha sin toe -- ha seen toe and the exploits of sam houston and davy crockett. the mexican war is known as polk's war. the 11th president, james k. polk, supervised it from its beginning in may 1846 to the treaty signing 21 months later. the peace treaty transferred 530,000 square miles from mexico to the united states, incredible territory. from mexico we obtained the future states of california, new mexico, arizona, nevada, utah and parts of colorado and wyoming. literally 42% of mexico's territory at that time. the major battles were fought at palo alto, monterey and buena vista, the gates of mexico city. always outnumbered, the americans won every major battle. sometimes, as in buena vista,
.se it really is a question of thestioof future economic policy of the united states. un that's what we're talking aboutre here today. tay i just. heard the republican leader say there is no budget. i really -- i don't know how to say this.es sometimes i wonder if colleagues pay attention to what they're here. voting on here. last in here in august we didn't pass a budget resolution pass a budget resolution. instead, we passed in a resolution is purely a congressional it never goes toresident the president for his signature has to pass both bodies and be signed by the president. last year, instead of a budget resolution, we did a budget law called the budget control act. the budget control act set the budget for the next two years for this year and next. more than that, it set ten years of spending caps, saving $900 billion. madam president in addition, the budget control act gave a special committee the authority to reform the tax system and the entitlement system of the country and it said if you come to an agreement special committee, your action cannot be filibustered. you have to
the number one strategic threat to the united states. that sounds very yesteryear i must say. we will have other panels talk about russia but i don't think anyone will buy on to that proposition and as for china, we all know that china is an easy target in some ways, but we have already mentioned people -- the wise heads of the republican party. i can assure you just read henry kissinger's latest book on china and candidate mitt romney will get a lot of advice between now and when it gets anywhere near the convention not to mention the white house to go easy on china. one reason i am puzzled by it is that will not win an election. it is the economy. >> you want to pick up on this? >> there are a lot of things about the nature of the challenge that we face. i start with the point that the economy is more dependent on the global economy than in the past and the collective action challenge homi talked about is real. i differ when i look at successful administrations. the republicans run as if american power unfettered from multilateral institutions is the way to run the world. they enter offi
the years the united states and other democratic countries have imposed sanctions on the burmese government to pressure for change. now that there seems to be some progress at what pace should those sanctions be lifted? how does the u.s. provide rewards for progress without losing he have arerage for further change? >> i understand from a news broadcast this morning that senator mccain is thinking of the suspension of sanctions rather than lifting of sanctions. it possible first step. what has been done at the e.u., what has been done by the e.u., they would suspend sanctions but not lift them all together. that is a way sending a strong message that we will help the process of democratization. if this is not maintained we will have this think of other ways of making sure that the aspirations of people of burma for democracy is respected. i am am not against the suspension of sanctions as long as the people of the united states feel this is the right thing to do at the moment. i do, i do have a caution though. i sometimes feel that things, people are too optimistic about the scene in burma.
, and he said that the united states wanted to be a tremendous partner and cheerleader of the development of brazil's offshore industry. now, mr. president, i have to tell you that was like rubbing salt in the wound of tens of thousands of oil field workers and others who are suffering because of the obama administration policy here in this country really discouraging energy development. the way president obama proposed to be a strong supporter and partner and cheerleader of brazilian offshore development was through an ex-im bank loan and there are many of these sorts of loans. again, in august, 2009, talking about brazil, the case i mentioned, "the wall street journal" reported an editorial that -- quote -- "the u.s. is going to lend billions of dollars to brazil's state-owned oil company, petrobrass to finance exploration of the huge offshore delivery in brazil's oil field near rio de janeiro" -- close quote. again the ex-im bank provided a $2 billion loan to aid brazilian oil production and that's what president obama was cheering and encouraging and making happen. it's happened other
that's the reason i'm running for a second term as president of the united states of america. [cheers and applause] .. >> his working assumption is, if ceos and wealthy investors like camera get rich, and the rest of us automatically will, too. there was a woman in iowa who shared heard stories of the financial struggles, and he gave her an answer right out of an economic textbook. he said are part activity equals our income. [laughter] and the notion was that somehow the reason people can't pay their bills is because they are not working hard enough. if they got more productive, then suddenly their incomes would go up. well, those of us who spent time in the real world -- [laughter] know the problem isn't the american people are not productive enough. you've been working harder than ever. the challenge we face right now, and the challenge we faced for over a decade is that harder work has not led to higher income. and bigger profits at the top have that lead to better jobs. what governor romney doesn't seem to get is that a healthy economy doesn't just mean a few folks in ma
or literary figures from the rest of the world, as you know. united states of america, the land i love and have adopted as my home, in recent decades has paid less and less attention. especially to literary translation. in the last 32 years come in the number of books translated, there has been a lot more translation of english literature in several countries than there has been in america. >> host: is there a contemporary writer in iran that you would recommend for people? >> guest: absolutely. let me first say that in spite of the islamic, or perhaps because of it, the lechery regime is going down in iran. and women are in center stage. i can give you one example about women. in 1947, we have the first major collection of short stories. there is a novelist but unfortunately passed away a couple of weeks ago. at the age of 90. women poets in iran go back several thousand years. poetry is more of a woman's thinking, act come and form. you don't need to go to a studio, you don't need directors, you don't need a cruel. it is a women's art. in 1947, it is the fifth major literary [inaudib
that refused to fight in the united states for example eugene debs rose to give a tour against american participation in the war and was sent to prison and was still in prison in november 1920 when he received nearly a million votes for president on the socialist ticket. another america the pioneer social worker jane addams also was a strong opponent of the war for more than 500 americans were jailed as conscientious objectors including these two at fort riley arkansas. in germany the great radical spoke out against the war and britain the meeting philosopher was most elegant of the war a hero for me writing this book. i will review one thing if you want describing the feeling he rode and i appreciate him because of this intellectual bravery and acknowledging the conflict in his feelings which is something that often most of us don't do when we take a political stand. they describe themselves as being tortured by patriotism as ardently as any retired colonel. love of them was the strongest the motion i possessed and in a period setting aside such a moment making it difficult as truth, t
through the auspices of the united states in an account other, that i would make a proposal at council to try to make available those proposals in a public way. i expressed that to the itu officials as well as giving an indication that we will be making a proposal. we haven't yet worked out -- it hasn't been agreed to by counsel and we haven't worked out modalities for doing that, but we are very aware of this issue and i think this is a process benefit by making available those proposals that people can see them. >> thank you. now, my other question is this, you can tell by virtue of the interest we have here today and in other places than in the u.s., there is beginning to be a knowledge about and concerned about potentially the proposals that could be raised. we've mentioned some of the countries from which there might need concern or proponents said the concerns that we have. but they just really briefly, around the world, either countries in which they are as united and are working the same way that the u.s. government has 13 to be prepared to address these? maybe you could just n
's a friend and ally of the united states. we are not calling for australian membership. we are calling for a partnership to develop. australia trains more energetically with germany and britain and france. you already trained significantly with the united states. let's say there is another humanitarian disaster the way there was in december of 2004 what happened on december 26th, australia, united states and japan and india deployed together to help the people of sri lanka and southern india because we had trained together in the air and sea. we want that type of cooperation. you have been a stalwart ally in afghanistan but you had to do it on the run not having worked very much with the european allies. it is inculcating patterns of cooperation and military training and confers no obligation on the part of parter countries. in essence it is the best of both worlds for the asia-pacific allies from my perspective. >> also hearing the most frequent complaint from australian officials is you are more than happy to use soldiers and resources in battle but we are not involved in the plannin
be bad for patients who rely on these medications and bad for the competitiveness of the united states. so i'm glad that this reauthorization, mr. president, clearly aways some of the conflict and the underbrush and will reauthorize and strengthen and streamline the review time line for new pharmaceuticals. not only will this provide the kind of predictability and certainty any business needs to succeed but it helps make sure the f.d.a.'s essential regulatory process keeps pace with scientific innovation. in my home state of delaware, there's more than 20,000 jobs that directly rely on biomedical research and innovation, but around the country, it's more than 4 million indirect and more than 675,000 jobs that directly benefit from this area. it's also, frankly, one of our strongest export areas of growth for the long term, so we need this reauthorization now. in my view, moving forward with this legislation also means finding the fine balance between speed and safety, between getting treatments to patients without delay and being certain these new drugs will be effective and safe. in a
the response would be in the united states you have human rights problem to. that is not a comparable discussion of. >> thank you for having me back. i like to be where the audience is a gauge. i am delighted to speak to an audience who want to be here. [laughter] i am flattered you took your evening to come listen to me. my students are interested but i know if they did not have a test or papers or held accountable most seats would be empty. so i buydown flattering. i could give you a test at the end. i will tell you about arid her and why i wrote a book about him called "the heartbreak of aaron burr." i cannot tell you the whole story without giving away the ending and i don't want to because not just because i want you to buy the book but the reason i wrote the book in the first place. and in particular quality at a question my mother put to me. it goes to the heart of why people write. i t trading to graduate students. those who also completed the come from history and communications, and the english department and the finance. they are apprentice writers
: the clerk will report. the clerk: pule j.watford of california to be united states judge for the ninth circuit. mr. reid: madam president, i ask -- let's see. i have a cloture motion. i want that reported, please. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the motion. clerithe clerk: cloture motion: we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, do hereby move to bring to a close debate on nomination of paul j. wattford of california to be the united states circuit judge for the ninth circuit signed by 17 senators as follows -- mr. reid: madam president, i would ask that the reading of the names be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: i ask unanimous consent that the mandatory quorum under rule 22 be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: i now ask, madam president, the senate resume legislative session. the presiding officer: without objection. the senate resumes legislative session. mr. reid: and what is the pending business? the presiding officer: the motion to proceed to s
. and the united states. so as i said at the beginning, 2010 was the summer of hate, two years ago. and you probably remember terry jones who promised to burn a copy of the quran. you might remember the beginning of an anti-sharia movement that pushes to pass legislation at a state level to ban sharia law, islamic law. it starts in oklahoma where there's this huge muslim population. no, there's knotts a huge miss -- there's not a huge muslim population in oklahoma. it's ridiculous, and the whole movement is ridiculous since there have been no cases of sharia law actually being cited with one exception in new jersey which was then overturned. and, of course, you remember that summer as well as two years before all of the rumors that obama, our president, is muslim. one-third of all republicans believed this according to polling at the time. one-quarter of the entire electorate believes this. and, of course, the ground zero mosque. the ground zero mosque becomes a political litmus test to determine how politicians stand on this key issue. mayor bloomberg, for it. newt gingrich, he's against i
bin laden and had great concerns about plotting attacks in the west, including in the united states. we know that a range of individuals like richard clarke were ringing alarm bells at the white house level. again, at that point, when we go back and look, it administration at that point was focused on things like the balkans and the kosovo war which was 1999. >> putting out fires elsewhere in the national security arena. >> yes. >> you talk about this wave of al qaeda violence. then they get beaten back. sometimes because of their own actions. what caused the temporary defeat the first time? was a launch into afghanistan? >> actually, it is almost the reverse of what we just outlined. the host that they had, the taliban regime, was overthrown. in addition to that, we saw the u.s. approach that was focused mostly on clandestine services. the cia come in a range of other intelligence services in a geospatial way, and special operations forces targeting in afghanistan and in afghanistan and other locations. >> we are talking about in 2001 how the united states fought back by sending in
the top counterterrorism threat to the nation. aqap has attempted several attacks on the united states in 2009 and 2010. we are currently exploiting an ied seized overseas which is similar to explosive devices used by aqap in the past. we also remain concerned about the threat from homegrown violent extremists. these individuals have no typical profile. their experience and motives are often distinct which make them difficult to find and difficult to stop. that may me turn next to counterintelligence. while we still confront additional s.b. notch, today's spies are students, researchers, business people or operators of front companies. they seek not only state secrets but also trade secrets, intellectual property and insider information from government, businesses and american universities. we are also seeing a growing insider threat. that is when employees use their legitimate access to steal secrets for the benefit of another company or another country. and of course the counterintelligence is now merging with the cyberthreat. so much sensitive data is stored on computer networks and
, that's false and ludicrous. now, my view on immigration in the united states and illegal immigration is formed from several different areas of experience. first had to do with my role as a staff officer for the third armored cavalry regiment, and providing active duty soldiers to assist with joint operations on a reservation which straddles arizona and mexico to help interdict the smuggling of drugs. it's also informed by my role as a life prosecutor prosecuting albany duis in maricopa county with the passage of an amendment to specifically deny bail to those in the country without lawful authority who committed serious offenses. anytime that i have someone who is a mexican national or even from canada, the accused of a felony dui, they would be admitted to bail in which they would feel to show for subsequent prosecution. then in supervising prosecutions are maricopa county, i dealt first in what circumstances in which drug cartels in mexico would order cars from street gangs in phoenix. which would then be picked up by someone who crossed the border, ostensibly as a one day tourist,
for managing this transition i think it will withstand the test of time. at the united states in europe go their separate ways and figuring out how to preserve a rules-based system, then i hear that the next 20 or 30 years will be a very substantive period and international history. .. >> we are chasing to get out. we collectively, the reliance as you were just saying, senator, and i think it will be a long time coming before nato engages in the same kind of operation if engaged in in afghanistan. libya, i think the success more conclusive, but many of the conditions that were present in libya are not being replicated elsewhere, particularly in syria. a u.n. legal authority, the approval of the arab world, the degree to which libya was close to reservoirs of european power and, therefore, easy to the europeans did you even though they still relied heavily on us. in that regard i think some of the most important nato programs moving forward will not be the deployment of force, even though surely there will be some of that. they will be the broad array of programs, the partnerships, the medi
for this is the books are conceived as a history of the united states sort of as told through biographies. and i was looking for a woman subject for one of these. and, in fact, i found one, but my publisher wouldn't let me do it. can you guess what woman i was looking for and found? eleanor roosevelt. i mean, just the fact that it's a very short list of women who played a large role in american public life on whom i can hang a tale of four or five decades of american history. women have had, of course, their roles in private life, but it's in the nature of private life that it usually doesn't survive in historical record. why did people start saving the letters of eleanor roosevelt? because she was important. do your correspondents save your letters that you write to them? and then do they deposit them in the local historical society? [laughter] well, maybe. and if they do, you will become -- i use my words advisedly here -- you will be become, literally, immortal. you'll become immortal in letters because future historians will find those letters and say, ah. so that's what life was like at the
the aircraft. he flies the airplane 1600 miles across the united states making a stop in st. louis on the way and setting a transcontinental flying record of 21 hours and 40 minutes. and when he gets to new york, there's a very short window of opportunity for him to actually take off. when he hasn't slept, i think, for a night, he's awake the entire time of his flight. he drifts off now and then, but comes back realizing how dangerous it is for him to fall asleep. but it's estimated he was awake for, what, 60 hours bob? 63 hours before he made the flight, so he was very, very tired. i'm sorry, i guess 33 hours on the flight and then 30 hours beforehand. so the whole flight is really about struggling to stay wake. and make no mistake about it, this was a dangerous flight. first of all, by crossing, by taking the route that he took, the polar route, he extended the distance that anyone had ever flown across the atlantic. and there had been others who had flown the atlantic before lindbergh. the distinction here, and it's an important distinction, is that he did it nonstop and solo. so he takes
in the southwest united states, where cities that were, if you take certain cities on the edge of california, on their edge of los angeles, for example, that were -- had a conventional post war democratic and have now become 90 to 95% hispanic, this is a democratic that wasn't even in the 1960 u.s. census. that's actually a big transformation in a fairly short space of time. and it has consequences. now, when you put the why, i would do you care, that's the benign view. people think -- we were talking about broadway just we went on air. that's like the production of holiday pel low doll -- "hello dolly" and then he ran out of brassy, middle-aged blonds, and then he changed it to an all-black cast, and people think that's what happened if you have a muslim netherlands or muslim britain, there will be fewer pubs, the pubs will have to close, but essentially it will basically still be the same, and i don't think that's -- no serious person would argue that. >> host: on the cover of the new paperback version of "america alone" there's a little sticker, soon to be banned in canada. >> guest: that
of the united states of america, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the presiding officer: the clerk will read a communication to the senate. the clerk: washington, d.c., may 23, 2012. to the senate: under the provisions of rule 1, paragraph 3, of the standing rules of the senate, i hereby appoint the honorable kirsten e. gillibrand, a senator from the state of new york, to perform the duties of the chair. signed: daniel k. inouye, president pro tempore. the presiding officer: the majority leader. the clerk will report the motion. the clerk: motion to proceed to calendar number 400, s. 3187, a bill to amend the federal food, drug and cosmetic act, and so forth and for other purposes. mr. reid: we are now on the motion to proceed to the f.d.a. user fees bill. the republicans will control the first half-hour, the majority the second half-hour. we're working on an agreement to consider amendments to the f.d.a. bill. we're close to being able to finalize that. we hope to get on an agreement and avoid filing cloture on t
attack in the united states in view of taking oath not to harm it when he was awarded his american citizenship. he responded that he lied when he took the oath. that shahzad's lie amount to betrayal and does not fall under permissible lying if the enemy during times of war. please request that pakistani taliban brothers to address this matter. also draw their attention to the fact that brother faisal shahzad appeared in photograph alongside commander f masoud. leader of attp. when he acquires american citizenship this requires taking an oath to not to harm america if he is unaware of this matter he should be informed of it. we must act swiftly to remove the suspicion that he engaged in the betrayal. the times square attempted attack was not only one that had the al qaeda no hand in pakistan. it is clear from the letters that the group's indiscriminate attacks, pakistani taliban's indiscrimenant attacks against muslims were of major concern to al qaeda. this led them to write a letter to respected brother massoud, the leader of the ttp. the authors explicitly stated that the satisfa
plotting attacks in the west including in the united states. we know that a range of individuals like richard park had alarm bells ringing at the white house level, but, again, at that point, when we go back and look, the administration at that point was focused on things like the balcans and fires elsewhere. >> host: in the national security arena. now, you talk about this wave of al-qaeda violence, and then they get beaten back. sometimes, because of their own actions, what caused the kind of temporary defeat the first time? was it our launch on afghanistan? >> guest: well, actually, it's about the reverse of the coin we just outlined. they lost the sanctuary in afghanistan so the host they had, the taliban regime, was overthrown, and in addition to that, we saw a u.s. approach that was focused mostly on services, the cia, the range of other intelligence services, nsa, geospatial, and then in special operational forces targeting in afghanistan and then in pakistan and other locations. >> host: you're talking about in 2001, how the u.s. fought back by sending in cia and special force
plotting attacks in the west including in the united states. we know that a range of individuals like clark had alarm bells at the level, but when we go back and look the administration at the plant was focused on things like the balkans and the kosovo war which was 1999, some issues other than -- >> host: putting out fires elsewhere in the national security arena. now, you talk about this wave of al qaeda violins and then they get beaten back. sometimes because of their own actions. what caused the kind of temporary defeat the first time? was it our launch into afghanistan? >> guest: it's almost a reverse of the coin we just outlined. they lost the sanctuary afghanistan so the hope they had, the taliban regime was overthrown, and in addition to that, we saw a u.s. approach focused on the clandestine services. the cia, the range of other intelligence services, geospatial and then in the special operations forces targeting in afghanistan and then in pakistan and other locations. >> host: you're talking about in 2001 how the u.s. fought by sending in the cia and special forces working togethe
, will be revitalized and refocused on article v. the united states has f-16 training programs in poland and will retain a base in romania so there is just a few examples of the steps that we have taken as a nation as an alliance to reassure our eastern allies. there is more that can be done but i think those important first step so i've laid out these four problems in my argument is that at the summit and within nato, we are taking steps to deal with all of those problems. doesn't it doesn't mean they go away. but steps are taken to deal with them. >> thank you, madam. >> thank you all very much. i want to start dr. binnendijk with your comments amount missile defense and as mr. brzezinski mentioned earlier, this month we heard russia suggest that they might use preemptive force against missile installations if there is not a topic of agreement reached with nato. do you think this is just posturing? do you think there are -- this represents a heightened -- a heightened threat on the part of russia to oppose the missile defense installation or should we just expect more rhetoric and continue as you sugg
the united states government our embassy been able to in any way make contact with your extended family and friends who are at grave risk and suffering beatings crux >> [speaking chinese] i'm not free career on the specifics, but i do know the u.s. embassy has been communicating with me everyday. >> your wife and children, how well are they doing on this enormous burden clacks >> [speaking chinese] mcminn they're doing fine especially my children, my wife and i that this is such a wonderful place we can play outside, and he said you can tell from what they told my wife and i held terrible back to our home town. >> [speaking chinese] >> translator: because my wife and children have been under such a long time of difficulty with of the nutrition and lubber and pressure -- low blood pressure and when i saw them under the circumstances i felt very saddened. >> [speaking chinese] the panel witnesses to suggest to hire his own lawyers not to accept the government appointed lawyers for his family members. >> i am wondering whether there is any lawyer that has been accepted to be. we have heard
in 1983, we must make sure that any adversary who thinks about attacking the united states or our allies, or our vital interests, that the risks to him outweigh any potential gain. i don't believe that creating a u.s. military with no margin for error is the best way to ensure our allies or to deter our potential enemies and that is what i am worried about. america and the world are safer and more prosperous when the u.s. maintains military power and strength beyond challenge and i think it is the preeminent purpose of this subcommittee and today's hearing as much as is possible in this unclassified context, to drill down and ensure congress and the american people that they understand the risk of this budget that we would incur with what you have proposed today into our warfighters and our country. finally, secretary panetta has described the defense sequestration cuts as catastrophic inflicting severe damage to our national defense for generations. he compared the cuts to shooting ourselves in the head. it even with these compelling statements, i am still amazed that congress has not m
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 286 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)